Starcraft 2: Legacy of the Void

1) Will the new map editor support placing of traps, doors, and other things commonly referred to as doodads in unorthodox situations? (ie doors, auto guns, wall traps in a jungle map)

Yes, any object defined in the data files can be placed on the map, regardless of which tileset it is normally associated with.
Click to expand...

Prepare for palm tree missile turrets, bitches.

Prepare.

Edit: Oh -

8) Will players be able to give units Protoss shields or Zerg regeneration that don't normally have them? ie, a regenerating Zealot, a Ghost with shields, etc. (battle.net) DrakeClawfang

Yes, you could create a Roach-Zealot hybrid if you would like. Many passive abilities can be interchanged similarly.
Click to expand...

So if you pull that shit on me, prepare for undead Roach Archons with laser eyes.

Edit 2: Wait, wait. fuck all of that. Custom races?

I'm going to mount nukes on Seige Tanks. And also warp blades. Warp blades that they can shoot. And cause the target to explode into undead Roach Archons.
 
Put all the nukes on all the tanks you want. Still only does 10 damage to a regular ol' Protoss Immortal.

Now just imagine that Protoss Immortal with the Mothership's black hole.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']Put all the nukes on all the tanks you want. Still only does 10 damage to a regular ol' Protoss Immortal.
[/QUOTE]

Yeah. That'll change before release.
 
Not a fan of this latest briefing. I realize that realism != fun, but reducing the importance of terrain like this does not make me a Happy Camper.

EDIT: To clarify, I'm not a supporter of the "% chance to miss" stuff either, but making LoS the only thing changed by terrain features is pretty weak. Ah well - it'll get changed 20 times from here 'til release.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']Not a fan of this latest briefing. I realize that realism != fun, but reducing the importance of terrain like this does not make me a Happy Camper.

EDIT: To clarify, I'm not a supporter of the "% chance to miss" stuff either, but making LoS the only thing changed by terrain features is pretty weak. Ah well - it'll get changed 20 times from here 'til release.[/QUOTE]

It's not like that shit ever means anything in a game. The only honest factor is the whole multi-level thing, i.e. a siege tank bombing someone below him.

I know I tried sending marines behind a tree, only to watch whatever the fuck I was shooting waltz right up to him anyway. Especially since in BN games, you're probably throwing a marine against a zealot or a zergling, so the cover never mattered anyway...
 
[quote name='Strell']It's not like that shit ever means anything in a game. The only honest factor is the whole multi-level thing, i.e. a siege tank bombing someone below him.

I know I tried sending marines behind a tree, only to watch whatever the fuck I was shooting waltz right up to him anyway. Especially since in BN games, you're probably throwing a marine against a zealot or a zergling, so the cover never mattered anyway...[/quote]Eh. You gimme a group of Goliaths hiding in trees against a group of Goons in open ground, and shit can get pretty fucked up. You don't really see that sort of thing come into play in a game because it's not very often that a map maker will plant a forest in the middle of the map. I can't imagine putting a "% chance to miss zone" would be all that popular among most players.

What I would go for, however, would be wet ground slowing down troops. I'd like to see Zerglings charging down a hill get a bonus to their first attack. fuck, I'd like to see hills, period - the world ain't all flatlands and cliffs and ramps. Maybe some rough ground that a Zealot would be able to traverse but a clumsy Immortal wouldn't (though with Dragoon pathfinding as it is, some 'Toss might not notice the difference). Would that require balancing? Yes. Would some of that stuff be too difficult to balance and have to be thrown out? Probably. But if multiple building selections, infinite control groups, an idle worker button, and smartcasting are in, then we're going to need some new... wrinkles... to the gameplay.

/me awaits Darren telling him in great detail why it wouldn't work and isn't needed.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']Eh. You gimme a group of Goliaths hiding in trees against a group of Goons in open ground, and shit can get pretty fucked up. You don't really see that sort of thing come into play in a game because it's not very often that a map maker will plant a forest in the middle of the map. I can't imagine putting a "% chance to miss zone" would be all that popular among most players.

What I would go for, however, would be wet ground slowing down troops. I'd like to see Zerglings charging down a hill get a bonus to their first attack. fuck, I'd like to see hills, period - the world ain't all flatlands and cliffs and ramps. Maybe some rough ground that a Zealot would be able to traverse but a clumsy Immortal wouldn't (though with Dragoon pathfinding as it is, some 'Toss might not notice the difference). Would that require balancing? Yes. Would some of that stuff be too difficult to balance and have to be thrown out? Probably. But if multiple building selections, infinite control groups, an idle worker button, and smartcasting are in, then we're going to need some new... wrinkles... to the gameplay.

/me awaits Darren telling him in great detail why it wouldn't work and isn't needed.[/QUOTE]

no idea how stuff like that would work, I think it'd be interesting though

yeah, and you're right about the forest thing, note
http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/maps/169_Demon's_Forest
it was thrown out early because it was pretty much broken (stuff like archons trying to morph while in the forest would get stuck or something)
 
As someone who's not a huge Starcraft fan, those sound like great changes. The micro part of the game never appealed to me all that much. Intelligent units and better rally points $$$$
 
[quote name='Serik']As someone who's not a huge Starcraft fan, those sound like great changes. The micro part of the game never appealed to me all that much. Intelligent units and better rally points $$$$[/QUOTE]

yeah you have to understand that those guys cover professional starcraft, so things that make the game significantly easier will definitely irk them :D
 
Some sounds good, some sounds bad. Unit AI could definitely use some improvement from SC1, but this auto-surround thing is just bad shit. Not sure about the new rally points - the use of lone peons to bugger them up sounds weird. I'm neutral on MBS.
 
I guess it depends on how you like your RTS games. Better AI would help massive games like SupCom: as supreme commander, you shouldn't have to babysit your units. It's not like Patton had to tell his tanks how to flank the enemy. But for squad-based RTS games, where micro is part of the fun, super-intelligent units might detract from the experience.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']Some sounds good, some sounds bad. Unit AI could definitely use some improvement from SC1, but this auto-surround thing is just bad shit. Not sure about the new rally points - the use of lone peons to bugger them up sounds weird. I'm neutral on MBS.[/quote]

Yea nothing was worse than the AI on Sc1. I was so easy to go 1v7 against the cpu and win with no problem :drool:
 
[quote name='chodax']Yea nothing was worse than the AI on Sc1. I was so easy to go 1v7 against the cpu and win with no problem :drool:[/QUOTE]

haha he's not talking about the AI computer, he's talking about the behavior of units in general, like path finding and whatnot
 
[quote name='Oktoberfest']haha he's not talking about the AI computer, he's talking about the behavior of units in general, like path finding and whatnot[/quote]

Yea that's what I meant...

:whistle2:#
 
not really...they usually all aim for your base but then meet in the middle and go FFA on each other. if they were staggered, THEN they would all be beating on ur base one at a time.
 
I can usually stop the zerglings, and generally stop the zealots, but when the marines show up with medics all in the first 3-4 minutes, I'm done.
 
Don't really see much M&M - I don't play against Terrans all that often, and when I do, they're pretty non-aggressive. I generally just rely on the High/Dark Templar to deal with that business. DT are a rather nice way to stop someone who gets greedy and sends out M&M without detection or armour upgrades thanks to their OHKO against Marines, but again, this happens so rarely to me that I'm not really up on the proper ways to fight it. I suppose Reavers would work, too.
 
I don't get why he keeps referring to the "classic" ling/muta combo when every ZvZ game that gets to late game involves muta/scourge + pro micro and maybe a few lings to sneak in and kill drones

anyways, thanks for the update, yo

I certainly hope ZvZ in SC2 remains micro intensive and all about low econ because watching ZvZ matches is quite exciting because they're often very close
 
Eh. Mutalings is a classic combo, albeit not necessarily a classic ZvZ combo. Maybe that's what he meant?

Also, anyone think that the current Stalker model looks a lot like an Ing Warrior from Metroid Prime 2? I personally like it and think it should stay, but I guess that ain't happening. Doesn't really matter, so long as we get a new Dark Templar. And by a new one, I mean I want the old one.
 
I think their concept art looks like a C&C Scrin unit...

[quote name='The Crotch']Eh. Mutalings is a classic combo, albeit not necessarily a classic ZvZ combo. Maybe that's what he meant?

Also, anyone think that the current Stalker model looks a lot like an Ing Warrior from Metroid Prime 2? I personally like it and think it should stay, but I guess that ain't happening. Doesn't really matter, so long as we get a new Dark Templar. And by a new one, I mean I want the old one.[/quote]
 
#44 out. Karune doesn't seem to be too familiar with the Terran Wall as it exists now...

EDIT: New name for the Terran Nomad: it's now a "Vulkan". New shots of it and a redesigned Archon should be coming soon.

So, yeah, I'm guessing November. In the mean-time, enjoy this:

archonconcept.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A slightly deceptive link title there. It's a trilogy in the same way that the first NWN, SoD, and HotD are a trilogy.

On the one hand, this is weak shit.

On the other hand, the main game will be out sooner.

On the the genetic-freak-of-a-third hand, Protoss get the third campaign. fuck yeah! I smell another glorious sacrifice to destroy the Zerg and/or Pyrrhic victory (my favourite kind of victory).
 
With what is currently known about this release plan, I can't see it really working as planned. If multiplayer remains "full" on the first release/campaign, then what motivation is there really to buy the second and third? Unless they were priced cheap enough, seems a lot of people would just buy one for the multiplayer, and pirate the rest.
 
[quote name='The linked article']
The Protoss campaigin will likewise be differentiated by elements of diplomacy.
[/quote]

I can't help but picture some kind of Futurama DOOP hilarity going on here, primarily where the Terrans concern themselves with the fact that the Protoss have no lips, and therefore are untrustworthy. Shut up - Jim Raynor doesn't count since he's one of the smarter people running around.

How about a release date, dammit? You're going to piecemeal it out and I can deal with that. But that better mean I get my first taste sooner. Don't be like Valve, who seems to have completely misunderstood what "episodic content" implies.
 
[quote name='infinitepez']With what is currently known about this release plan, I can't see it really working as planned. If multiplayer remains "full" on the first release/campaign, then what motivation is there really to buy the second and third? [/QUOTE]

It'll be like Smash Bros Brawl, where going online lead to people getting spoiled on the roster.

I can see it now.

SC2 player goes online> AWWW MAN THEY SPOILED THAT THE ZERG ARE PLAYABLE
 
[quote name='Strell']It'll be like Smash Bros Brawl, where going online lead to people getting spoiled on the roster.

I can see it now.

SC2 player goes online> AWWW MAN THEY SPOILED THAT THE ZERG ARE PLAYABLE[/quote]

I sure don't see you around no mo'.
 
[quote name='Strell']Heh. Maybe it's the other way around and I'm in the wrong ones. That's more likely.[/quote]

I mean seriously; what the fuck am I doing in a Starcraft thread? My sole purpose of coming here was to oogle your goodies, Strell.
 
[quote name='thekeybladewars']I mean seriously; what the fuck am I doing in a Starcraft thread? My sole purpose of coming here was to oogle your goodies, Strell.[/QUOTE]

That's what everyone else is here for.

[quote name='Kaijufan']I wonder what the room was like when they announced this at Blizzcon?[/QUOTE]

Smelly.

Nerdy.
 
I just got back from blizzcon. Starcraft 2 is freaking sweet.

A lot of units got changed and a lot of new units were introduced.

IE. Zerg creep is now dumped onto the playing area from Overlords.


Diablo 3 was also playable, and it was awesome :D
 
=( I hate you.

[quote name='sasukekun']I just got back from blizzcon. Starcraft 2 is freaking sweet.

A lot of units got changed and a lot of new units were introduced.

IE. Zerg creep is now dumped onto the playing area from Overlords.


Diablo 3 was also playable, and it was awesome :D[/quote]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top